A petition has been filed in the Delhi High Court seeking an Election Commission enquiry against Rajya Sabha MP and BJP leader Rajeev Chandrasekhar for filing a false affidavit along with his nomination papers for the Rajya Sabha Elections in March 2018..The petition has been preferred by one Renjith Thomas on the premise that filing false affidavits infringes the fundamental right of voters and also raises doubt on the constitutional guarantee of free and fair elections..Filed through Advocates Avani Bansal and Chandrashekhar A Chakalabbi, the petition also seeks a direction to the Election Commission to inquire into all the complaints made with respect to the filing of false affidavits in terms of Section 125A of The Representation of the People Act, 1951..It is the petitioner’s case that Rajeev Chandrasekhar failed to disclose the ownership of his Land Rover, Lamborghini, private jet, two properties in Bengaluru, and his wife’s shareholding in a company while filing his nomination papers of the Rajya Sabha Elections in March 2018. It has further been alleged that Chandrasekhar did not disclose the annual income of Rs 3.73 crore earned from his house which is leased to his own company, Jupiter Capital..The petition also highlights the dubious role played by Jupiter Capital which was set up with an investment of Rs. 640 crore. This amount was also not mentioned in the affidavit, it is claimed..The petitioner further informs that he had sent a representation to the Election Commission, elucidating how Chandrasekhar was misusing the law and not declaring his actual assets..The Election Commission, however, relied upon a 2014 circular and replied that under Section 125A, there was no stipulation that complaints under the Section have to be made by the Returning Officer. Instead, any aggrieved person could move the appropriate court of competent jurisdiction for action under Section 125A in case of any false declaration or concealment of information in the affidavit..The petitioner thus argues that this circular cannot be read in a manner that shrinks the Election Commission of India’s constitutional duty to investigate into matters of false complaints, especially when a prima facie case is made out against the candidate..Therefore, the notification must be read to mean that it allows an aggrieved person along with the Returning Officer to approach the local criminal court, it has been submitted..It is further argued that the scope of ‘aggrieved person’ in the notification contestable, and that not every ‘aggrieved person’ is resourceful enough to directly take on a sitting MP/MLA by filing a case against him/her..The petitioner thus prays for a direction to the EC to conduct an enquiry into the false affidavits filed by Chandrasekhar as well as other complaints under Section 125A..Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.